Girl Forced to Have Chemotherapy

[aljdewey]

for all we know, she's a typical 17 year-old who thinks that she'll never die…

And if she is, she'd probably still think so in the coming few months when she turns 18. Heck, most people in their early- and mid-twenties can't really appreciate their mortality, either.

 

[missy]

Here's a follow up with the young woman. Interesting.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/connecticut-teen-who-refused-chemo-now-remission-seeks-freedom-n320061

17-year-old girl who initially refused treatment for a highly curable cancer is now in remission and is seeking release from state custody to finish her last two months of chemotherapy at home, the teen and her lawyer said Monday.

The patient, called only Cassandra C. in court papers, has changed her mind about undergoing chemotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma, once seeing the drugs as "poison." She now fully intends to complete her prescribed, six-month regimen, she told NBC News.

"I'm committed to finishing the rest of my chemo, which is 2 more cycles, March and April. I would love more than anything to be able to come home to finish it all. I miss my life so dearly, especially my mom, my cat and my boyfriend," Cassandra typed from her hospital room in an interview conducted via Facebook messages.

State child-welfare officials removed the teens's cell phone in December, Cassandra said. State workers returned the phone about six weeks later, based on her request. However, the device was not working well enough Monday to allow a phone interview, she said.

"I will never be okay with how this all happened — being taken away from home, hospitalized and especially being strapped to the bed for the surgery for the port placement. Although I haven't had any major side effects besides hair loss, I still wish I was given the right to explore and go with alternatives," Cassandra wrote.

"Anybody should have that right. Minor or not. But, hearing the wonderful news about being in remission — not having any visible signs of active Cancer is what helped me accept the chemotherapy, knowing it's working and I don't need any radiation. [That] encouraged me to keep going and just get it done and over with."

Cassandra was ordered into temporary state custody in January by the Connecticut Supreme Court. State justices ruled she was legally too immature to make her own medical conditions. They ordered her to continue chemo at a Hartford hospital where those treatments began in November. She was diagnosed in September.

Now, the teen wants to commute from her mother's residence to finish out her chemo sessions instead of being held against her will at the facility, said her lawyer, assistant public defender Joshua Michtom.

"She should be allowed to go home," said Michtom, who is scheduled to argue for Cassandra's freedom next Monday at a hearing in juvenile court.

"If, somehow, she shouldn't complete treatment, there's not a great risk that she would die. So, we're going to argue that at this point there is no imminent risk of harm," Michtom told NBC News.

"This is a kid who had a job [at a mall retail store], who was contributing to household finances, had a credit card that she was paying the bills on regularly. Now, she's lost the job. She's behind on her bills," he added. "It's not that she doesn't have the money to pay them ... She's in the hospital, and she just can't do it. So her whole life has been on hold."

The hearing next Monday presumably would pit Michtom's argument that Cassandra be released now against the stance of the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF), which has retained custody of the teen since January.

"It just seems like there's no reason to postpone that another two months," Michtom said.

DCF Commissioner Joette Katz declined to respond specifically to Michtom's assertions that Cassandra is no longer a harm to herself and should be allowed to return home now.

"We are very pleased with Cassandra's progress toward a complete recovery," Katz said in a statement.

"We understand how difficult this has been for Cassandra and her family, but we have had full confidence throughout that the medical professionals involved in her treatment would be successful in saving her life," Katz zaid.

Michtom said that Cassandra's doctor told him that Cassandra is now in remission.

At Connecticut Children's Medical Center in Hartford — where Cassandra has been undergoing her chemo treatments — a spokeswoman declined comment, citing patient confidentiality laws.

Doctors have said her odds of recovery are 80 to 85 percent with chemo, but that she would die without it.

Her mother, Jackie Fortin, has said she supports her daughter's decision.

"There's been a lot of misinterpretation and exaggeration about my mom," Cassandra wrote. "Through both the media and [DCF]. My mom in no way had an influence on my decisions.

"Last summer when doctors were trying to determine what was wrong with me and Cancer was in question I had told my mom that I would not do chemotherapy if it turned out to be Cancer (not knowing I wouldn't of had a choice). When I was diagnosed with cancer It broke my moms heart, she knew there was no changing my mind," she added in another Facebook message.

"Not that she didn't try-she tried to encourage me to do it, she told me a mother should never have to lose her child, and that we'll get through it. But that wasn't going to convince me. My mind was set on seeking alternatives for treatment. My mom loves me, she wasn't going to fight me. She decided to stand by my side, and support whatever it was that I wanted."

The remaining rounds of chemo can be completed in three-day stretches for which she could be driven from her mother's home back to the hospital, Michtom said.

She also takes pills and could "certainly do that at home, the public defender added. "As it is now, she is mostly at the hospital doing nothing."

First published March 9th 2015, 2:57 pm

In the absence if treatment she would have died. With treatment survival rate is 85%. Those facts are clear. And now she is in remission. That is a happy fact and great result for her. And she said she will willingly continue the chemo now that it has worked and she only has March and April left for chemo treatments. The chemo for Hodgkin Lymphoma is life saving treatment for most. That is another fact.

Jambalaya, according to this article her only major side effect from the chemo is hair loss.

Thank you for posting about this. I hadn't heard of this case till I read your thread. I sure am glad I am not on the supreme court because this was not an easy decision for them to make I am sure but ultimately I think it was the best one.

We shall see in a year's time and further along how Cassandra feels about this whole ordeal. If she will be more thankful than bitter though I am sure right now she feels more of the latter than the former. She was too emotionally immature to make that decision IMO and unfortunately 2 months won't be enough time for her to suddenly become more emotionally mature but there has to be a line drawn somewhere and 18 is the age of consent. Like it or not.

 

[chemgirl]

Thank you for posting Missy. Glad she is doing better and hope she is allowed to continue treatment from home.

Also great that she doesn't need radiation, since increased odds of breast cancer are more closely associated with radiation.

It does sound like she was very uninformed and a little bit stubborn at the beginning of treatment. There is no alternative therapy, I really wish people would stop preying on those who are ill.

The case I mentioned earlier where the Canadian government didn't force the girl into treatment and let her try alternative treatment, her name was Malayla Sault and she didn't make it a year. She was at an alternative treatment center.

I'm still pretty firm that these girls, Cassandre included, don't really get that this will kill them without chemotherapy. You can find so much information online about natural and alternative therapies. There are treatment centers and "doctors". It can seem legitimate, but it's not. Adults get drawn into it, so why not children and teenagers? Great, cancer treatments with no chemicals and no side effects. What teenage girl wants hair loss.

It's all just so frustrating and I still feel that the government acted to essentially stop a teenager from killing herself.

 

[momhappy]

B/c she's young, our first instinct is to say NO YOU CAN'T QUIT. EVER. NO MATTER WHAT. But what gives us the right to decide that she hasn't tried hard enough, or done enough or been thru enough or put herself thru enough? (a couple months from the time she legally becomes an adult no less) Do we think she doesn't value herself or her life enough? People would give their left arms to have their loved ones brought back from their deaths of cancer and here's this smarmy young thing thinking she can make decisions for her life when she doesn't "get it" and *she* has the possibility of a longer life when other loved ones didn't and we think she's throwing her life away. Is there a length of time, like you have to go thru 11 rounds of the hardest chemo ever, and then we go ohhh yeah that really sucked for you, ok go ahead and throw in the towel? And when we're not the ones going thru it and we're not the ones helping a loved one go thru it looking it in the face 24/7, it's a bit easier to sit here and our computers and be her champions to not give up.

Well, I agree, Packrat. How many people who are OK with this girl having unwanted treatment forced on her would be OK with the same thing happening to them - a treatment that is definitely not wanted by you, remember.

I also do not understand why adults get a chemo break and this girl didn't.

But anyway, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks. The state did what it wanted, and it's done now. And hey, maybe there will be a positive outcome. Maybe sheĺl live to be 90, and won't get another cancer, and will travel the world, and feel right within herself about the forced treatment. There was something in TIME magazine the other week about positive people having lower cancer rates. I hope she feels positive about the whole thing when she feels better.

This whole case stems around the fact that she lives in Connecticut. Many states have adopted a "Mature Minor" law that takes into account the age and situation of a minor to determine maturity. It allows minors above the age of 16 to take part in the decision making process when it comes to serious medical issues. This particular girl was not allowed to "take a break" from chemo because Connecticut doesn't have a Mature Minor Law - She was considered a minor at age 17 and therefore the state intervened. I have mixed feelings about it, but again, the line has to be drawn somewhere in those states that don't allow for individual circumstances. Had she lived in another state, perhaps her medical requests would have been granted….

 

[Jambalaya]

Missy, thanks for posting the update.

I'm so glad the girl is happy!

 

[Jambalaya]

Ah, OK, just read the link. She's not 100% happy. She is trading her acquiescence to two more cycles for the chance to go home, as she has been held against her will in a hospital for the last few months and had her phone taken away from her as well, for six weeks.

"I will never be okay with how this all happened — being taken away from home, hospitalized and especially being strapped to the bed for the surgery for the port placement. Although I haven't had any major side effects besides hair loss, I still wish I was given the right to explore and go with alternatives," Cassandra wrote."

But she is happy that the chemo worked. So it's a mixed bag.

 

[msop04]

Ah, OK, just read the link. She's not 100% happy. She is trading her acquiescence to two more cycles for the chance to go home, as she has been held against her will in a hospital for the last few months and had her phone taken away from her as well, for six weeks.

"I will never be okay with how this all happened — being taken away from home, hospitalized and especially being strapped to the bed for the surgery for the port placement. Although I haven't had any major side effects besides hair loss, I still wish I was given the right to explore and go with alternatives," Cassandra wrote."

But she is happy that the chemo worked. So it's a mixed bag.

How many times have even grown adults said, "I'll never...", only to admit it was a stupid thing to think or say?? This is a teenager talking... hair grows back -- death is permanent.

She's alive. I believe in time she'll be forever grateful for being made to live instead of die, as she originally chose. ...like when she gets to go to college and/or gets to experience love/marriage.

Let's be real -- alternative therapies will not treat or cure cancer. It would have been slow, agonizing death for her. I don't get the argument of "not agreeing" with health care professionals when it comes to such complex conditions as this. They are professionals for a reason... you are not. It's the same as the anti-vax movement... based on fear, scapegoating, and popular trends, but certainly not knowledge. (sorry... just a real pet peeve of mine)

Life itself is a mixed bag, and no one is 100% happy about most aspects of it but she would have never had the chance to experience a lot of it if not for the state stepping in... I think she'll agree it was the right decision. I hope she continues to do well and leads a healthy, happy life.

 

[Jambalaya]

Oh, I certainly don't agree with alternative treatments to cure cancer, no way.

It's a pity she wasn't given more time to come round to the chemo on her own. She had time.

She said she will never be OK with the forced nature of the treatment, but yes, when she gets to experience her life in full I'm sure she will be grateful. But on the other hand, it's her body, her life, and part of me feels she should have agency over her own body. Otherwise, when push comes to shove, your body belongs to the state and not to you. Nobody wants to be strapped down and forced to take treatment that they don't want. It sounds like a horror movie.

On the other hand, she has her life now.

It's a really complex issue.

 

[VRBeauty]

Late to the thread, but it did spark a few random thoughts.

First, I do think the state should in some cases force medical procedures on behalf of a child, even if it goes against the parents' wishes. The most obvious example is parents who choose not to have a medical procedure because of their religious beliefs. If parents chose not to allow the use of medically necessary medication (i.e., insulin), blood transfusions, or surgery to save the life of their child, should the state just step back and give them the "freedom" to do that? I don't think so.

In this case you could see the "religion" as a belief that an alternative therapy would eradicate the cancer.

When the question then becomes "at what point should the child be allowed to make this decision on their own," I agree with Missy. A line is needed, and 18 - which is seen as the age at which people become legally responsible for their own actions in many other circumstances, is not a bad choice for this situation.

My views are colored by my brother's experience. He underwent very aggressive cancer treatment for a tumor found just after he turned 16. It wasn't forced on us (as a family) - in fact, my mother had to seek it out because the doctor who was consulted initially decided that his cancer was too advanced to warrant life-saving treatment. My mother wasn't so ready to accept the diagnosis of inevitability though, and took my brother to see doctors at a nearby teaching/research hospital. My brother became a guinea pig. He underwent very extensive and aggressive treatment that was part of a research protocol aimed at showing that a combination of chemo therapy and radiation could beat non- Hodgkin's lymphoma into submissions, and at identifying the dosages needed to do so. The treatment was successful, though he did periodically have to deal with some complication. He lived a pretty darn good life before cancer found him again 40 years later. In fact, it was good enough that he ultimately opted to for treatment for this latest cancer, even the treatment is in itself arguably extreme and life-altering.

 

[telephone89]

We have a similar online thing and they do that also. The medical treatment gets a bit stickier. They are still able to decline but we are held responsible and doctors, schools, etc can call CPS if they feel needed treatments aren't being done. Not sure where it goes from there. Thankfully, we haven't gotten to that point yet.
Oh....but we have had "A" authorize a (thankfully minor) thing and the doctor did it without getting an okay from us then sent us the bill.

Okay that's not cool. Yes, be responsible for your own decisions, but let your parents pay the cost :S

 

[msop04]

We have a similar online thing and they do that also. The medical treatment gets a bit stickier. They are still able to decline but we are held responsible and doctors, schools, etc can call CPS if they feel needed treatments aren't being done. Not sure where it goes from there. Thankfully, we haven't gotten to that point yet.
Oh....but we have had "A" authorize a (thankfully minor) thing and the doctor did it without getting an okay from us then sent us the bill.

Okay that's not cool. Yes, be responsible for your own decisions, but let your parents pay the cost :S

I was wondering about something like this! If the pt isn't footing the bill, shouldn't the parents have some say?? (yes, I'd love that nose job while I'm out!)

 

[House Cat]

We have a similar online thing and they do that also. The medical treatment gets a bit stickier. They are still able to decline but we are held responsible and doctors, schools, etc can call CPS if they feel needed treatments aren't being done. Not sure where it goes from there. Thankfully, we haven't gotten to that point yet.
Oh....but we have had "A" authorize a (thankfully minor) thing and the doctor did it without getting an okay from us then sent us the bill.

Okay that's not cool. Yes, be responsible for your own decisions, but let your parents pay the cost :S

I was wondering about something like this! If the pt isn't footing the bill, shouldn't the parents have some say?? (yes, I'd love that nose job while I'm out!)

During the class where we were informed that our child could authorize or refuse treatment, we were also informed of the shocking news that our child could move out and a judge would approve as long as the child was safe and needs were met, AND we would still be legally responsible for anything the child did while NOT living in our home until the age of 18. I'll never forget the psychologist's words "if your child decides they want to live with Suzi and eat toast all day, the judge has to approve because the child is safe and their needs are met."

Sigh, it is a broken system.

 

[telephone89]

msop04 - I agree. Be responsible for yourself when you can support those decisions!

house cat - Broken indeed, that seems crazy. Do the kids know this? Did you have to take this class with your child? Or is it something that no one tells their kids lest they go off?

 

[Jambalaya]

B/c she's young, our first instinct is to say NO YOU CAN'T QUIT. EVER. NO MATTER WHAT. But what gives us the right to decide that she hasn't tried hard enough, or done enough or been thru enough or put herself thru enough? (a couple months from the time she legally becomes an adult no less) Do we think she doesn't value herself or her life enough? People would give their left arms to have their loved ones brought back from their deaths of cancer and here's this smarmy young thing thinking she can make decisions for her life when she doesn't "get it" and *she* has the possibility of a longer life when other loved ones didn't and we think she's throwing her life away. Is there a length of time, like you have to go thru 11 rounds of the hardest chemo ever, and then we go ohhh yeah that really sucked for you, ok go ahead and throw in the towel? And when we're not the ones going thru it and we're not the ones helping a loved one go thru it looking it in the face 24/7, it's a bit easier to sit here and our computers and be her champions to not give up.

Well, I agree, Packrat. How many people who are OK with this girl having unwanted treatment forced on her would be OK with the same thing happening to them - a treatment that is definitely not wanted by you, remember.

I also do not understand why adults get a chemo break and this girl didn't.

But anyway, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks. The state did what it wanted, and it's done now. And hey, maybe there will be a positive outcome. Maybe sheĺl live to be 90, and won't get another cancer, and will travel the world, and feel right within herself about the forced treatment. There was something in TIME magazine the other week about positive people having lower cancer rates. I hope she feels positive about the whole thing when she feels better.

This whole case stems around the fact that she lives in Connecticut. Many states have adopted a "Mature Minor" law that takes into account the age and situation of a minor to determine maturity. It allows minors above the age of 16 to take part in the decision making process when it comes to serious medical issues. This particular girl was not allowed to "take a break" from chemo because Connecticut doesn't have a Mature Minor Law - She was considered a minor at age 17 and therefore the state intervened. I have mixed feelings about it, but again, the line has to be drawn somewhere in those states that don't allow for individual circumstances. Had she lived in another state, perhaps her medical requests would have been granted….

Momhappy - yes, I see what you mean. I agree the line has to be drawn somewhere. It's a pity all states don't have the Mature Minor rule because it sounds so sensible.

 

[Jambalaya]

To others who have contributed with their knowledge about medical laws pertaining to minors...thank you. It's amazing that the laws are so very different in varying states. I had no idea.

Makes me realize afresh how lucky I was to get through my own childhood without any health issues.

 

[momhappy]

Yes, Jambalaya, when it comes to these sorts of issues, the one-size fits-all approach is rarely successful. I would certainly like to see more things evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

 

[partgypsy]

I do like the idea of a mature minor law, because people do mature at different rates. My 12 year old is amazingly mature (more mature than many adults I bet) while my youngest I'm sure will not be at that stage at that age.

This hit home with me, where about 10 years ago one of my mother's best friend was dx with advanced breast cancer. She was into alternative treatments. Against doctor's recommendations, she decided against conventional treatments. My mother pleaded with her to reconsider. She also though of chemo as "poison". She went to Mexico for alternative treatments, then came back up the the US, died about a year and a half after her diagnosis, though the doctors felt she had a very good chance with traditional treatment. She was an adult, it was her decision, but what was hard for my mother, is that her friend truly believed these alternative treatments would cure her, rather than understanding the choice between no real treatment (and probable death) and treatments that were invasive with known side effects, but could potentially cure the cancer.

 

[msop04]

We have a similar online thing and they do that also. The medical treatment gets a bit stickier. They are still able to decline but we are held responsible and doctors, schools, etc can call CPS if they feel needed treatments aren't being done. Not sure where it goes from there. Thankfully, we haven't gotten to that point yet.
Oh....but we have had "A" authorize a (thankfully minor) thing and the doctor did it without getting an okay from us then sent us the bill.

Okay that's not cool. Yes, be responsible for your own decisions, but let your parents pay the cost :S

I was wondering about something like this! If the pt isn't footing the bill, shouldn't the parents have some say?? (yes, I'd love that nose job while I'm out!)

During the class where we were informed that our child could authorize or refuse treatment, we were also informed of the shocking news that our child could move out and a judge would approve as long as the child was safe and needs were met, AND we would still be legally responsible for anything the child did while NOT living in our home until the age of 18. I'll never forget the psychologist's words "if your child decides they want to live with Suzi and eat toast all day, the judge has to approve because the child is safe and their needs are met."

Sigh, it is a broken system.

Agreed.

 

[msop04]

Momhappy - yes, I see what you mean. I agree the line has to be drawn somewhere. It's a pity all states don't have the Mature Minor rule because it sounds so sensible.

It does sound sensible, but then there's the question of who gets to decide if said minor is "mature enough" to fall into that category?? Sounds like a big can of worms to me... as most complex issues are...

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,


Just to mention that alternative medicine was the road followed by Steve Jobs of Apple. He decided no chemo, he would battle this his way. It didn't work and he was too late for traditional treatments. He spoke about his decisions and of course would change what he did, if he could. Sometimes we don't get second chances.

There is one problem that i see in allowing this young woman to go home, and that is that usually each successive treatment brings with it harsher symptoms(side effects). You get sicker and sicker as the body keeps being attacked by the chemo. I hope she is apprised of this. She may still refuse to complete the course of treatment.

It heartens me to see when the Gov't does a good thing. Good for those people who cared and made a difference. I hope one day she will thank them.


Annette

 

[partgypsy]

Hi,


Just to mention that alternative medicine was the road followed by Steve Jobs of Apple. He decided no chemo, he would battle this his way. It didn't work and he was too late for traditional treatments. He spoke about his decisions and of course would change what he did, if he could. Sometimes we don't get second chances.

There is one problem that i see in allowing this young woman to go home, and that is that usually each successive treatment brings with it harsher symptoms(side effects). You get sicker and sicker as the body keeps being attacked by the chemo. I hope she is apprised of this. She may still refuse to complete the course of treatment.

It heartens me to see when the Gov't does a good thing. Good for those people who cared and made a difference. I hope one day she will thank them.


Annette

Same thing with Farrah Faucett.

 

[Jambalaya]

Momhappy - yes, I see what you mean. I agree the line has to be drawn somewhere. It's a pity all states don't have the Mature Minor rule because it sounds so sensible.

It does sound sensible, but then there's the question of who gets to decide if said minor is "mature enough" to fall into that category?? Sounds like a big can of worms to me... as most complex issues are...

I know, but in any group or beyond any cut-off, there will be those much more mature than others. I think the Mature Minor law is meant to recognize that there's a huge cognitive difference between a seventeen-year-old and someone much younger, like say a nine-year-old.

Another reason I think it's sensible is because it allows a kind of sliding scale of what decision-making you're allowed according to age. It give you power over yourself more gradually. As someone else here said, it's not as if you get tapped with a magic wand when you're 18 and suddenly you're much more mature.

But some states have age 12 as the age of medical consent, which seems young to me. So I assume that means a twelve-year-old in those states could refuse chemo. What do you make of that?? I definitely think that twelve is too young.

Edit: As some states do have the Mature Minor rule, it would be interesting to know if that has worked for them, or if has indeed proved to be a can of worms, like you say. I don't know enough about the rule in any detail or what outcomes those states have had from the law - it could be somewhat new and relatively untested, for all I know.

 

[Jambalaya]

Part-Gypsy, that's a really sad story. Also Steve Jobs, that's sad too. Are there really holistic practitioners out there who say they can cure cancer? I suppose there must be. That is terrible. I see a use for holistic treatments in terms of managing the stress and maybe some of the side-effects of treatment, but that's all.

Annette - I'm not sure if any decision has been made yet regarding whether she can go home. I see what you mean about cumulative effects making her sicker. But if her type of chemo doesn't do that, it would be much better for her mental health if she could be at home instead of confined to a room like she has been for the last few months. That's enough to drive anyone stir-crazy.

 

[partgypsy]

Yes, there are all kind of people out there (promising things and providing false hope).
It is definitely a balancing act between giving people choices in their medical care, and providing care. I worked on a study which examined advanced directives in a mental health setting. The idea is if you have a written document done when the patient is stable, that can stand in for him/her when they are having a mental health crisis, versus say having involuntary commitment or involuntary medication use. Nothing is perfect but the aim is to have people make their own informed choices in their health care. Being involuntarily committed or detained (which is what happened to this girl) is a stressful experience and can lead to mistrust of health care providers, so it is obviously a last case scenario and even then there are limited situations where this can be done legally.

 

[packrat]

Well it's a good thing we took the life altering decisions out of the 17 year olds hands regarding her own life. Now, had she been 13 and wanted to have a baby, that would've been ok. Minors are of course well equipped to handle being a parent and even tho they are not capable of making decisions about their own lives, they are sure to be able to make decisions regarding someone else's life.

 

[momhappy]

I don't believe that conventional medicine is necessarily the end-all, be-all magic treatment for everything. I believe that there are alternative therapies out there that can help and/or cure. Chemo works for some, but not others. I had a family member essentially die from it. Obviously, they were dying of cancer, but what ultimately took him was complications related to chemotherapy (severe weight loss and heart failure due to damage of the heart that was caused by the chemo). I don't see anything terrible about giving people alternatives if that's what they want. Honestly, if I was faced with a diagnosis, I'd be researching everything, including alternative treatments. I know of too many friends & family members who have not had success with chemo and even the ones that have, often times the cancer comes back years later. I'm certainly not knocking chemo and/or conventional medicine, but I wouldn't poo-poo alternative medicine either because it has its place.

 

[missy]

momhappy, there are different chemotherapies just as there are different cancers. For this cancer chemo is the only way for such a high rate of cure. Nothing else. I agree do your research and make sure you have the full picture but for this cancer there are no acceptable alternative therapies.

 

[luv2sparkle]

We have a similar online thing and they do that also. The medical treatment gets a bit stickier. They are still able to decline but we are held responsible and doctors, schools, etc can call CPS if they feel needed treatments aren't being done. Not sure where it goes from there. Thankfully, we haven't gotten to that point yet.
Oh....but we have had "A" authorize a (thankfully minor) thing and the doctor did it without getting an okay from us then sent us the bill.

Okay that's not cool. Yes, be responsible for your own decisions, but let your parents pay the cost :S

I was wondering about something like this! If the pt isn't footing the bill, shouldn't the parents have some say?? (yes, I'd love that nose job while I'm out!)

When my son was injured and in a coma, the hospital would not give us information or allow us to authorize treatment because he was 18. They did however, put a 1 million dollar lien on our house. Needless to say, we got a lawyer.

 

[momhappy]

momhappy, there are different chemotherapies just as there are different cancers. For this cancer chemo is the only way for such a high rate of cure. Nothing else. I agree do your research and make sure you have the full picture but for this cancer there are no acceptable alternative therapies.

I am very well aware of that. My post was not in in response to this girl and her cancer, it was a general response to the recent discussion on chemo (or rather conventional medicine) vs. alternative therapies.

 

[TooPatient]

We have a similar online thing and they do that also. The medical treatment gets a bit stickier. They are still able to decline but we are held responsible and doctors, schools, etc can call CPS if they feel needed treatments aren't being done. Not sure where it goes from there. Thankfully, we haven't gotten to that point yet.
Oh....but we have had "A" authorize a (thankfully minor) thing and the doctor did it without getting an okay from us then sent us the bill.

Okay that's not cool. Yes, be responsible for your own decisions, but let your parents pay the cost :S

I was wondering about something like this! If the pt isn't footing the bill, shouldn't the parents have some say?? (yes, I'd love that nose job while I'm out!)

When my son was injured and in a coma, the hospital would not give us information or allow us to authorize treatment because he was 18. They did however, put a 1 million dollar lien on our house. Needless to say, we got a lawyer.

Yikes!

So..... I know this happens, but how!?!
When I go to the doctor, they make me sign a thing that basically says if the insurance doesn't cover it is my responsibility. I remember signing one for "A" when I took her in to a physical. Do they just keep it on file until revoked?